Literature DB >> 22089393

The biomechanical effect of pedicle screws' insertion angle and position on the superior adjacent segment in 1 segment lumbar fusion.

Ho-Joong Kim1, Heoung-Jae Chun, Kyoung-Tak Kang, Seong-Hwan Moon, Hak-Sun Kim, Jin-Oh Park, Eun-Su Moon, Bo-Ram Kim, Joon-Seok Sohn, Yu-Na Ko, Hwan-Mo Lee.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A finite element analysis.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between the position of an inserted pedicle screw and the corresponding facet contact force or intradiscal pressure. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Although superior facet joint violation by pedicle screws is not an uncommon occurrence in instrumented lumbar fusion surgery, its actual biomechanical significance is not well understood. Furthermore, the association between the position of the pedicle screw and the stress on the corresponding disc/facet joint has yet to be investigated.
METHODS: According to the positions of pedicle screws in L4 of the L4-L5 lumbar fusion, 4 L4-L5 fusion models were simulated. These models included the violation of both L3-L4 superior facet joints by pedicle screws (facet joint violation [FV] model), the nonencroachment of both L3-L4 superior facet joints by pedicle screws (facet joint preservation [FP] model), and the removal state of pedicle screws in the FV model (removal of violated pedicle screws [rFV] model). The facet joint contact [FC] model represented the scenario in which the pedicle screws did not encroach upon either facet joint but were inserted close to the L3-L4 facet joint surface. Moreover, the uninstrumented fusion [UF] model represented the uninstrumented L4-L5 fusion. In each scenario, the intradiscal pressures and facet contact forces at the L2-L3 and L3-L4 segments were analyzed under extension and torsion moments.
RESULTS: The FV model yielded the greatest increases in facet contact force and intradiscal pressure at the L3-L4 segment under extension and torsion moments. Following the FV model, the increases in intradiscal pressure and facet contact force were the second highest in the FC model followed by the FP model. Furthermore, the rFV model represented prominent reductions of previously increased facet contact force and intradiscal pressure at the L3-L4 segment.
CONCLUSION: In models of 1-segment lumbar fusion surgery, the positions of pedicle screws were closely linked with corresponding disc stresses and facet contact forces. However, even in cases of facet violation by pedicle screws, removal of the pedicle screw after fusion completion can reduce facet contract forces and disc stresses under both extension and torsional moments.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22089393     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31823f2115

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  27 in total

1.  CT accuracy of percutaneous versus open pedicle screw techniques: a series of 1609 screws.

Authors:  Todd M Chapman; Daniel J Blizzard; Christopher R Brown
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-07-29       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Finite element analysis and cadaveric cinematic analysis of fixation options for anteriorly implanted trabecular metal interbody cages.

Authors:  Pedro Berjano; Juan Francisco Blanco; Diego Rendon; Jorge Hugo Villafañe; David Pescador; Carlos Manuel Atienza
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Robot-assisted and conventional freehand pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Shutao Gao; Zhengtao Lv; Huang Fang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-10-14       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Biomechanical analysis of fusion segment rigidity upon stress at both the fusion and adjacent segments: a comparison between unilateral and bilateral pedicle screw fixation.

Authors:  Ho-Joong Kim; Kyoung-Tak Kang; Bong-Soon Chang; Choon-Ki Lee; Jang-Woo Kim; Jin S Yeom
Journal:  Yonsei Med J       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 2.759

5.  Comparison of superior-level facet joint violations during open and percutaneous pedicle screw placement.

Authors:  Ranjith Babu; Jong G Park; Ankit I Mehta; Tony Shan; Peter M Grossi; Christopher R Brown; William J Richardson; Robert E Isaacs; Carlos A Bagley; Maragatha Kuchibhatla; Oren N Gottfried
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 4.654

6.  A new lumbar fixation device alternative to pedicle-based stabilization for lumbar spine: In vitro cadaver investigation.

Authors:  Cengiz Gomleksiz; Deniz Ufuk Erbulut; Halil Can; Manoj Kumar Kodigudla; Amey V Kelkar; Eser Kasapoglu; Ali Fahir Ozer; Vijay K Goel
Journal:  J Spinal Cord Med       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 1.985

7.  Anterior and Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion With Supplemental Interspinous Process Fixation: Outcomes from a Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Study.

Authors:  Ripul Panchal; Ryan Denhaese; Clint Hill; K Brandon Strenge; Alexandre DE Moura; Peter Passias; Paul Arnold; Andrew Cappuccino; M David Dennis; Andy Kranenburg; Brieta Ventimiglia; Kim Martin; Chris Ferry; Sarah Martineck; Camille Moore; Kee Kim
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08-03

8.  Robotic-Navigated Percutaneous Pedicle Screw Placement Has Less Facet Joint Violation Than Fluoroscopy-Guided Percutaneous Screws.

Authors:  Gennadiy A Katsevman; Raven D Spencer; Scott D Daffner; Sanjay Bhatia; Robert A Marsh; John C France; Shari Cui; Patricia Dekeseredy; Cara L Sedney
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2021-05-04       Impact factor: 2.210

Review 9.  Comparison of cranial facet joint violation rate between percutaneous and open pedicle screw placement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Liang Wang; Yipeng Wang; Bin Yu; Zhengyao Li; Ye Li
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 1.889

10.  Treatment of unstable thoracolumbar fractures through short segment pedicle screw fixation techniques using pedicle fixation at the level of the fracture: a finite element analysis.

Authors:  Changqing Li; Yue Zhou; Hongwei Wang; Jun Liu; Liangbi Xiang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.